ESCOBEDO v. ILLINOIS

Print this Page
Case Basics
Docket No. 
615
Petitioner 
Escobedo
Respondent 
Illinois
Advocates
(Argued the cause for the petitioner)
(Argued the cause for the respondent)
(Argued the cause for the American Civil Liberties Union, as amicus curiae, urging reversal)
Tags
Term:
Facts of the Case 

Danny Escobedo was arrested and taken to a police station for questioning. Over several hours, the police refused his repeated requests to see his lawyer. Escobedo's lawyer sought unsuccessfully to consult with his client. Escobedo subsequently confessed to murder.

Question 

Was Escobedo denied the right to counsel as guaranteed by the Sixth Amendment?

Conclusion 
Decision: 5 votes for Escobedo, 4 vote(s) against
Legal provision: Right to Counsel

Yes. Justice Goldberg, in his majority opinion, spoke for the first time of "an absolute right to remain silent." Escobedo had not been adequately informed of his consitutitonal right to remain silent rather than to be forced to incriminate himself. The case has lost authority as precedent as the arguments in police interrogation and confession cases have shifted from the Sixth Amendment to the Fifth Amendment, emphasizing whether the appropriate warnings have been given and given correctly, and whether the right to remain silent has been waived.

Cite this Page
ESCOBEDO v. ILLINOIS. The Oyez Project at IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law. 22 November 2014. <http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1963/1963_615>.
ESCOBEDO v. ILLINOIS, The Oyez Project at IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law, http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1963/1963_615 (last visited November 22, 2014).
"ESCOBEDO v. ILLINOIS," The Oyez Project at IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law, accessed November 22, 2014, http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1963/1963_615.